(MAC No.640/2023) 2025:CGHC:53879 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MAC No. 640 of 2023 {Arising out of award dated 4-3-2023 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bemetara, District Bemetara in Motor Accident Claim Case No.17/2022} 1. Yogeshwari Netam, Wd/o Late Dihulal, Aged about 28 years. 2. Pramod Singh Netam, S/o Late Dihulal, Aged about 9 years (minor) 3. Ashish Gond, S/o Late Dihulal, Aged about 7 years (Minor) No.2 & 3 are minor, through natural guardian mother Yogeshwari Netam. All R/o Village Dhap, Tahsil Saja, District Bemetara (C.G.) (Claimants) ... Appellants versus 1. Yuvraj Chandrasen, S/o Khemsingh Chandrasen, Aged about 36 years, R/o Village Silhati, Outpost Podi, Police Station and Tahsil Bodla, District Kabirdham (C.G.) 2. Abdul Hamij, S/o Jakir Khan, R/o House No.13/196, Taiyaba Chowk, Talapara, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3. National Insurance Company Limited, through Divisional Manager, R/o Akash Ganga Complex, Supela, Bhilai, G.E. Road, Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) (Non-applicants) ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Akash Shrivastava, Advocate. Single Bench:- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal SISTA SOMAYAJULU Digitally signed by SISTA SOMAYAJULU Date: 2025.11.04 18:19:20 +0530 (MAC No.640/2023) Judgment on Board 04/11/2025 1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellants herein/claimants calling in question legality, validity and correctness of the impugned award dated 4-3- 2023 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bemetara, District Bemetara in Motor Accident Claim Case No.17/2022, by which their application for grant of compensation has been rejected. 2. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants herein/claimants, would submit that the Claims Tribunal is absolutely unjustified in holding that respondent No.2 was not negligent in driving the offending vehicle, therefore, it has erred in rejecting the application. 3. Mr. Akash Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company/respondent No.3 herein, would oppose the appeal and support the impugned award. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also gone through the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Admittedly, as per the finding recorded by the Claims Tribunal in paragraph 7 of the impugned award, the driver of the offending vehicle Mazda bearing registration No.CG-10/Y-2377 namely, Abdul Hamij – respondent No.2 herein, was convicted for offence under (MAC No.640/2023) Section 283 of the IPC, Sections 66/192A & 56/192 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and sentenced to pay a fine of ₹ 10,000/- in total. Furthermore, both the witnesses namely, Yogeshwari Netam (AW-1) & Santosh Kumar (AW-2) have clearly stated that though the vehicle Mazda was standing on the side of the road, but the indicator light was switched off, therefore, the deceased could not see the vehicle as it was dark and the deceased dashed the vehicle and died. 6. In that view of the matter, the impugned award is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Claims Tribunal to quantify the amount of compensation by recording its finding, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above with no order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE Soma